IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Iot-directorate] [Rats] Segmented strings (Re: [Last-Call] EAT profiles (was Re: Iotdir last call review of draft-ietf-rats-eat-13))

Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> Thu, 09 June 2022 19:27 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@lear.ch>
X-Original-To: iot-directorate@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iot-directorate@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 485B0C15791C; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 12:27:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.773
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.773 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.876, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=lear.ch
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PofFypYwmq8r; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 12:27:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (upstairs.ofcourseimright.com [185.32.222.29]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86AEBC157903; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 12:27:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPV6:2001:420:c0c0:1003::4bc] ([IPv6:2001:420:c0c0:1003:0:0:0:4bc]) (authenticated bits=0) by upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-18) with ESMTPSA id 259JQx5G1254695 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 9 Jun 2022 21:27:00 +0200
Authentication-Results: upstairs.ofcourseimright.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lear.ch
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=lear.ch; s=upstairs; t=1654802820; bh=l+ygcqRDVWZi0ERCn0G1Pu4oxm4TVclyVo8k7Phs2jA=; h=Date:To:Cc:References:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=HzmQVWYGU/BbvlfuizYEPgkJM+iWG2FRUgzhyAwbQTIkbhfpGZsnw6GyEOcp0eRjP TDeH10i4n6nZxMukDDTTF7iAXU7kJxneh9HHaOdayYCIkhRFPbFF8rHokWmf2LxTld 2LEAaizwZPctP1YUUvzWgy18GYLmezlbzQXw4Ysk=
Message-ID: <4fe4542a-3dc7-a280-7c45-26a4b6e08f55@lear.ch>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2022 21:26:57 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com>, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Cc: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, iot-directorate@ietf.org, draft-ietf-rats-eat.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, rats@ietf.org, cbor@ietf.org
References: <165443386776.35361.12898474920348394274@ietfa.amsl.com> <E267AEDE-D1DB-415B-B28F-DD78A517D27A@island-resort.com> <A38F37B7-2E81-451F-86BA-0A041760EB7E@tzi.org> <9E4661C8-DFB7-4BC3-A7B5-150C774917F0@island-resort.com> <8C044EB7-92CF-4306-9025-FD667E1B0F22@tzi.org> <B7C27559-92B6-4426-821B-431A08341C72@island-resort.com>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
In-Reply-To: <B7C27559-92B6-4426-821B-431A08341C72@island-resort.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------VoeiuPjsKxWPugtDsIhEJ8FT"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iot-directorate/miXjpefiDogl52bbGeETTKAP88s>
Subject: Re: [Iot-directorate] [Rats] Segmented strings (Re: [Last-Call] EAT profiles (was Re: Iotdir last call review of draft-ietf-rats-eat-13))
X-BeenThere: iot-directorate@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list for the IoT Directorate Members <iot-directorate.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iot-directorate>, <mailto:iot-directorate-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iot-directorate/>
List-Post: <mailto:iot-directorate@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iot-directorate-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iot-directorate>, <mailto:iot-directorate-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2022 19:27:17 -0000

Ok, the authors will be pleased to read that this is my last note on 
this particular subject.

On 09.06.22 21:17, Laurence Lundblade wrote:
> Yes, we could do that in EAT, but should we?
>
> My answer is no because:
>
>     1) EAT should stay aligned with COSE and CWT as much as possible.
>
>     2) Disallowing string chunks in EAT would remove one issue, but 15
>     more remain (section 7 has 16 subsections). It’s not enough of a
>     gain to justify divergence from CWT.
>
> I could be convinced on this particular one, but I can’t see ever 
> getting the number of issue to zero without severely crippling EAT. 
> For example, algorithm flexibility has to stay in IMO. Key 
> identification and distribution is another that has to stay.

I won't claim in any way to be EAT expert.  I was asked to do an 
external review, and as a reviewer it would be wrong for me to dictate, 
“Do things my way”.  You guys are the ones who are going to have to live 
with this work far more than I will.  My last suggestions to the working 
group are simply these: go through each of those 16 sections and see 
what can be agreed/constrained.  With what remains, where possible, I 
encourage you to enumerate options in as much detail as is practicable.  
That will allow for more code reuse.

Regards,

Eliot

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email